olin_piclist@embedinc.com (Olin Lathrop) wrote:
> Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> > In a sensibly designed language, the user wouldn't create names in
> > the same namespace where the standard library function names are.
> 
> None of the mainstream languages I've used had a reserved namespace for
> standard library functions. In fact, C is unusual with its notion of
> standard library functions.

I think that's what's special about C relative to most other compiled
languages. Yes, there's a "standard C library", but it is in fact
completely distinct and separable from the language/compiler itself.
You can write major applications -- especially embedded applications --
in C without even once calling a standard library function. I know,
because I've done it. I've even replaced parts of "crt.s" (implicit code
in the library that sets up the environment for and supports the compiled
code, usually in assembly language) without fuss.

Some of the participants in this thread are downplaying the whole notion
of separate compilation with an explicit linking step that is actually a
fairly key part of C. This is what allows you, for example, to replace a
standard library function wtih a custom implementation, again, with little
to no fuss. Suppose you don't need the full-blown functionality of
printf(), with its dependency on the floating-point library, etc. Just
write your own and link it in ahead of the standard library and it will be
used instead.

> Some operating systems take care to use special naming for their routines
> that are easily avoided by the user, but unfortunately Unix and Windows
> are not among them. The standard C library routines and Unix routines
> are particularly bad in this regard.

Well, now you're conflating several issues, few of which have anything to
do with the actual definition of the language. Library naming issues are a
problem in any language.

Again, I think C does fairly well in this area because of the separate
compilation. You can easily limit the scope of any particular set of names
down to a particular file if you need to. Setting up the linking sequence
may then takes some care, and you have to learn how to avoid circular
dependencies at that level. But once a project gets to this level of
complexity, the issues are largely independent of the particular
language(s) in use.

-- Dave Tweed
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist